Terrell McClain to I.R.

[DBOY3141]

so Romo and Dez can come back this year after broken bones, but this guy can't with a sprained toe. he only plays 37% of the snaps. I find it odd. wondering if this is just a way to keep him vs cutting him when Hardy comes back.

 

[CowboyRoy]

I didn't go that far out of my way. And you deserve it for publicly believing such silliness. It's not my job to protect you from your own opinions.

If Weeden can't play, the entire organization is to blame for not backing up the QB position better. Including the HC. That's pretty obvious, isn't it?

No, I think the QB thing is a Jerry Jones/Stephen/Clay issue. I wouldnt blame Garrett for that. He simply isnt the personnel guy for this organization. That much is clear. Maybe not to you.

And for you to say that you know better than me how things work behind closed doors is really laughable. At best, you and I have no real clue.

However, you can look at what has been presented to to us by Jones and the reactions of Garrett based on what has transpired.

Perfect example: Jones telling everyone it was HIS idea to have Garrett run the offense and be the HC. Then Jones telling EVERYONE he changed his mind and wants Garrett to only be the HC. That right there is 100% concrete evidence to anyone with half a brain that Jerry is the guy that decides what Garrett does and what he doesnt do. THEREFORE it was Jones decision to have Garrett NOT call plays and run the offense. And although you were turning a blind eye, it was MORE than clear that Garrett DIDNT want to give that up and it was quite obvious in the media with his denials and stubborn behavior.

But again, you can gloss over it however you like. The proof is in the facts and proof is in the record. 8-8 THREE YEARS IN A ROW Garrett running the offense. 12-4 first year a real OC gets in here.

 

[CowboyRoy]

On whose behalf are we blaming? You seem to not understand that many people do not think in terms of fault and blame. I for one do not when it comes to sports teams.

What do you even mean by properly anyway? They had Orton. He decided he liked to drink at games and his heart wasn't in it. They signed failed first round starter Weeden to groom him. He hasn't been all bad as much as your bias would have us believe otherwise. They traded for Cassell yesterday.

I realize you're trolling but the sentiment you are going for has a disconnect in what you think the normal NFL backup looks like. You want Sanchez, Cousins, or Mallet? Perhaps McGloin, Anderson, or Renfree was more of what you had in mind?

You really don't have any relative clue. Instead you parrot every negative connotation and uncertainty you can think of. Dance, monkey, dance.

Do we have the next franchise QB being groomed or anywhere in site? Are we even making a realistic attempt to find the next guy? To me that is PROPERLY. Or IMPROPERLY if you will.

But you seem like a prime troll candidate for the ignore feature.

 

[CowboyRoy]

On whose behalf are we blaming? You seem to not understand that many people do not think in terms of fault and blame. I for one do not when it comes to sports teams.

What do you even mean by properly anyway? They had Orton. He decided he liked to drink at games and his heart wasn't in it. They signed failed first round starter Weeden to groom him. He hasn't been all bad as much as your bias would have us believe otherwise. They traded for Cassell yesterday.

I realize you're trolling but the sentiment you are going for has a disconnect in what you think the normal NFL backup looks like. You want Sanchez, Cousins, or Mallet? Perhaps McGloin, Anderson, or Renfree was more of what you had in mind?

y

 

[Idgit]

No, I think the QB thing is a Jerry Jones/Stephen/Clay issue. I wouldnt blame Garrett for that. He simply isnt the personnel guy for this organization. That much is clear. Maybe not to you.

And for you to say that you know better than me how things work behind closed doors is really laughable. At best, you and I have no real clue.

However, you can look at what has been presented to to us by Jones and the reactions of Garrett based on what has transpired.

Perfect example: Jones telling everyone it was HIS idea to have Garrett run the offense and be the HC. Then Jones telling EVERYONE he changed his mind and wants Garrett to only be the HC. That right there is 100% concrete evidence to anyone with half a brain that Jerry is the guy that decides what Garrett does and what he doesnt do. THEREFORE it was Jones decision to have Garrett NOT call plays and run the offense. And although you were turning a blind eye, it was MORE than clear that Garrett DIDNT want to give that up and it was quite obvious in the media with his denials and stubborn behavior.

But again, you can gloss over it however you like. The proof is in the facts and proof is in the record. 8-8 THREE YEARS IN A ROW Garrett running the offense. 12-4 first year a real OC gets in here.

Yeah, it's not so clear to me that our HC is not involved in QB personnel decisions. I'm kind of embarrassed to have to type that out, because it ought to go without saying, but, yeah, the HC is involved in personnel decisions.

I never said I knew better what goes on behind closed doors, so I"m not sure what to specifically respond to there. I'm only talking about things which are observable or which are obvious from context with the information we do have.

Your bit about play calling responsibilities is all over the place, assuming things you seem to think I've said on the topic. It's difficult to dispute rationally because you're taking too many liberties. But Jerry calls the shots as to who the coach is, and he has the authority to make ultimate calls for the organization. He's always said that he does so in consultation with the rest of the team management, and I don't see any reason to believe that's not true. Every coach that's come through Dallas under Jerry--including Jimmy--has said that Jerry's very good at working with his coaches to put them in the situations they want to be in in order to be successful. I see no reason why that ought to be different with play calling and Jason Garrett. Not that it matters, anyway. What they're doing is working and that ought to be enough for you.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Yeah, it's not so clear to me that our HC is not involved in QB personnel decisions. I'm kind of embarrassed to have to type that out, because it ought to go without saying, but, yeah, the HC is involved in personnel decisions.

I never said I knew better what goes on behind closed doors, so I"m not sure what to specifically respond to there. I'm only talking about things which are observable or which are obvious from context with the information we do have.

Your bit about play calling responsibilities is all over the place, assuming things you seem to think I've said on the topic. It's difficult to dispute rationally because you're taking too many liberties. But Jerry calls the shots as to who the coach is, and he has the authority to make ultimate calls for the organization. He's always said that he does so in consultation with the rest of the team management, and I don't see any reason to believe that's not true. Every coach that's come through Dallas under Jerry--including Jimmy--has said that Jerry's very good at working with his coaches to put them in the situations they want to be in in order to be successful. I see no reason why that ought to be different with play calling and Jason Garrett. Not that it matters, anyway. What they're doing is working and that ought to be enough for you.

There is a big difference between being asked your opinion and getting the blame. I'm sure they asked Garrett what he thought, but its not his department. Now if this was Jimmy Johnson, then no doubt he gets blame. But Garrett simply doesnt have the say nor control that Jimmy had. As one poster tried to laughably imply earlier.

And you see no reason because you seem to enjoy giving the benefit of the doubt. When the owner tells everyone straight out it was his decision, the case is closed. Ignore that all you want.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Yeah, it's not so clear to me that our HC is not involved in QB personnel decisions. I'm kind of embarrassed to have to type that out, because it ought to go without saying, but, yeah, the HC is involved in personnel decisions.

I never said I knew better what goes on behind closed doors, so I"m not sure what to specifically respond to there. I'm only talking about things which are observable or which are obvious from context with the information we do have.

Your bit about play calling responsibilities is all over the place, assuming things you seem to think I've said on the topic. It's difficult to dispute rationally because you're taking too many liberties. But Jerry calls the shots as to who the coach is, and he has the authority to make ultimate calls for the organization. He's always said that he does so in consultation with the rest of the team management, and I don't see any reason to believe that's not true. Every coach that's come through Dallas under Jerry--including Jimmy--has said that Jerry's very good at working with his coaches to put them in the situations they want to be in in order to be successful. I see no reason why that ought to be different with play calling and Jason Garrett. Not that it matters, anyway. What they're doing is working and that ought to be enough for you.

And again, these blanket statements you seem to enjoy making. What THEY are doing is working? What exactly is working and who is THEY? You seem to want to include garrett in all the THEYS and therefore give him credit for everything. Yet when things were going so well it wasnt Garrett's fault now was it?

We just lost our starting QB with some scrub to take over and NO ONE else that knows the offense. We also dont appear to have a stable of backs to lead the charge. We will be lucky to be 500 with Romo out.

The only thing that could save our season is the defense. You going to include Garrett in THAT THEY? Of course you will. Simply because he is the head coach right?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

And again, these blanket statements you seem to enjoy making. What THEY are doing is working? What exactly is working and who is THEY? You seem to want to include garrett in all the THEYS and therefore give him credit for everything. Yet when things were going so well it wasnt Garrett's fault now was it?

We just lost our starting QB with some scrub to take over and NO ONE else that knows the offense. We also dont appear to have a stable of backs to lead the charge. We will be lucky to be 500 with Romo out.

The only thing that could save our season is the defense. You going to include Garrett in THAT THEY? Of course you will. Simply because he is the head coach right?

As the HC, he does get credit for everything. That is how it works after a HC has been coaching a team going on 5 years. Whinging about that is pointless. You seem intent to hang your hat on the uncertainty. You get that your playing towards doubt with everything is why I call you a fearmonger right?

 

[Alexander]

so Romo and Dez can come back this year after broken bones, but this guy can't with a sprained toe. he only plays 37% of the snaps. I find it odd. wondering if this is just a way to keep him vs cutting him when Hardy comes back.

It probably is. He's not good enough to carry on the roster yet still interesting enough to keep around. So IR it is.

 

[Idgit]

And again, these blanket statements you seem to enjoy making. What THEY are doing is working? What exactly is working and who is THEY? You seem to want to include garrett in all the THEYS and therefore give him credit for everything. Yet when things were going so well it wasnt Garrett's fault now was it?

We just lost our starting QB with some scrub to take over and NO ONE else that knows the offense. We also dont appear to have a stable of backs to lead the charge. We will be lucky to be 500 with Romo out.

The only thing that could save our season is the defense. You going to include Garrett in THAT THEY? Of course you will. Simply because he is the head coach right?

Not sure how this is confusing. I say "they" because it's consistently reported that the team is run by consensus between management coaching and scouting. With Jerry being the tie breaker. And that's pretty much what I say to you each time you appear to be confused by it.

And stop trying to play gotcha with the sneaky Garrett questions. Of course he's included in the they.

We're not really worse off than many teams would be if they lost their top two offensive playmakers. And I'm not seeing any emergency at RB. Instead, we're 2-0, with two division wins and a good shot at 3-0 on Sunday. Despite the injuries and suspensions.

I'm not sure what it is you think you're complaining about right now, but it definitely should not be any problem with the head coach.

 

[Floatyworm]

Yeah, So much for our conservative approach in the preseason to keep the team healthy.

Team Pussification.......Blame it on the CBA if you want. But the Cowboys 1/2 baked approach to pre-season is to blame.

 

[windjc]

Team Pussification.......Blame it on the CBA if you want. But the Cowboys 1/2 baked approach to pre-season is to blame.

Lol. That is a hair brain theory. It was you I saw in the parking lot of the holiday inn this morning wasn't it?

 

[CowboyRoy]

As the HC, he does get credit for everything. That is how it works after a HC has been coaching a team going on 5 years. Whinging about that is pointless. You seem intent to hang your hat on the uncertainty. You get that your playing towards doubt with everything is why I call you a fearmonger right?

LOL....EXACTLY. That is your MO. HC gets credit for everything. That is just a little too lazy for me.

Yet the same guys like you wouldn't blame Garrett for anything. Garrett does NOTHING special.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Not sure how this is confusing. I say "they" because it's consistently reported that the team is run by consensus between management coaching and scouting. With Jerry being the tie breaker. And that's pretty much what I say to you each time you appear to be confused by it.

And stop trying to play gotcha with the sneaky Garrett questions. Of course he's included in the they.

We're not really worse off than many teams would be if they lost their top two offensive playmakers. And I'm not seeing any emergency at RB. Instead, we're 2-0, with two division wins and a good shot at 3-0 on Sunday. Despite the injuries and suspensions.

I'm not sure what it is you think you're complaining about right now, but it definitely should not be any problem with the head coach.

And as I have said, you cant blame Garrett for the RB problem that you dont see, and the QB problem that you dont see. He simply doesnt have say over personnel.

The other problems that you dont see, may or may not be his fault.

 

[ottawacowpoke]

so Romo and Dez can come back this year after broken bones, but this guy can't with a sprained toe. he only plays 37% of the snaps. I find it odd. wondering if this is just a way to keep him vs cutting him when Hardy comes back.

soft tissue injuries often require much more time to heal.

 

[Idgit]

And as I have said, you cant blame Garrett for the RB problem that you dont see, and the QB problem that you dont see. He simply doesnt have say over personnel.

The other problems that you dont see, may or may not be his fault.

Except I did say Garrett was responsible for draft decisions, and I did say again that not addressing QB2 more seriously this offseason was a mistake.

This is because I see and acknowledge the problems that actually exist. There just aren't as many of them on a winning team.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Except I did say Garrett was responsible for draft decisions, and I did say again that not addressing QB2 more seriously this offseason was a mistake.

This is because I see and acknowledge the problems that actually exist. There just aren't as many of them on a winning team.

Well, you think you know what actually exist, but its quite clear that you gloss over some of the issues. And you acting like Garrett makes the personnel decision here is just ridiculous. They have a whole department for that and certainly Jerry, stephen, and then MClay are going to have more say over it than Garrett. And on defense who do you think they are going to ask who they like for his scheme Marinelli or Garrett?

There were probelems with the RB's that you seemed to gloss over. "we will be fine" and "they will just pass more" and "thats because they know what wins football games" were you classic lines before the season began. How is that working out for us passing the ball more?

3 turnovers in the first game and Romo hurt already. Everything will be just fine right?

 

[Idgit]

Well, you think you know what actually exist, but its quite clear that you gloss over some of the issues. And you acting like Garrett makes the personnel decision here is just ridiculous. They have a whole department for that and certainly Jerry, stephen, and then MClay are going to have more say over it than Garrett. And on defense who do you think they are going to ask who they like for his scheme Marinelli or Garrett?

There were probelems with the RB's that you seemed to gloss over. "we will be fine" and "they will just pass more" and "thats because they know what wins football games" were you classic lines before the season began. How is that working out for us passing the ball more?

3 turnovers in the first game and Romo hurt already. Everything will be just fine right?

I can't really help you with these problems you're convinced you see that don't actually exist. Nor with your bizarre insistence that the HC has no involvement in player personnel. He does, and it's a matter of record if you care to try to find that out.

As for how the backs are doing, I'm also not seeing what you're complaining about there. They're all playing solid football, just as I said they would. And they're productive catching the ball, just as I said they would be. And we've won the two football games we've played, because of our improved DL depth, just as I said we would. What exactly do you think you're pointing out here?

Because the issues offensively have been stripped balls and penalties. And Romo wasn't hurt on a blown protection. Honestly, I have no idea what point you think you're getting at.

 

[CowboyRoy]

I can't really help you with these problems you're convinced you see that don't actually exist. Nor with your bizarre insistence that the HC has no involvement in player personnel. He does, and it's a matter of record if you care to try to find that out.

As for how the backs are doing, I'm also not seeing what you're complaining about there. They're all playing solid football, just as I said they would. And they're productive catching the ball, just as I said they would be. And we've won the two football games we've played, because of our improved DL depth, just as I said we would. What exactly do you think you're pointing out here?

Because the issues offensively have been stripped balls and penalties. And Romo wasn't hurt on a blown protection. Honestly, I have no idea what point you think you're getting at.

AGAIN, I never said he has NO involvement. But its minimal.

You keep acting like he has Chip Kelly powers over this team. He simply doesn't.

The point about throwing the ball is quite clear. The more you have to pass or do pass, the more risk you take getting your QB killed and risky turnovers. Again, I cant help it if you wont acknowledge or understand those simple concepts of throwing vs passing.

 

[CowboyRoy]

I can't really help you with these problems you're convinced you see that don't actually exist. Nor with your bizarre insistence that the HC has no involvement in player personnel. He does, and it's a matter of record if you care to try to find that out.

As for how the backs are doing, I'm also not seeing what you're complaining about there. They're all playing solid football, just as I said they would. And they're productive catching the ball, just as I said they would be. And we've won the two football games we've played, because of our improved DL depth, just as I said we would. What exactly do you think you're pointing out here?

Because the issues offensively have been stripped balls and penalties. And Romo wasn't hurt on a blown protection. Honestly, I have no idea what point you think you're getting at.

The running game is not what it was last year, as I told it wouldnt be. You said it wouldnt matter.

We had 3 turnovers the first game and Romo got killed the 2nd game and is out for 10 games. All things I told you might happen with more passing. I was 100% proven right and you have been 100% proven wrong. The evidence is right there before your eyes. Deny it all you want or hide behind our hapless 0-2 record. If it wasnt for our defense, this team would be in shambles and probably 0-2. The offense has been a disaster. I think we are last in the league or close to it on 3rd down and distance to go. But who cares right?